Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chinese Consulate-General, Houston

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:05, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese Consulate-General, Houston

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This topic does not meet the GNG. There has been no coverage that I can find of the consulate itself. The sources listed are a) the consulate website, b) two maps of the area, which verify that the consulate exists, and c) an article about a man which briefly talks about a single event in his life - with one sentence about the consulate. While the event likely would warrant its own article, it does not mean that the consulate. There is no significant independent coverage of the consulate, and as such it doesn't warrant its own article. Karanacs (talk) 19:38, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:05, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:05, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:05, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:05, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as WP:GNG requires independent third party coverage. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:12, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Li Cunxin, the source of the consulate's only momentary blip in notability. —SMALL JIM 20:59, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 01:22, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The current article is a WP:COATRACK. The proposed redirect is WP:UNDUE. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 08:34, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, do not redirect. Nom explains why the article doesn't belong, Have mörser explains why it is annoying and the proposed redirect non-neutral, esp. given the puny traffic. My own web search confirms the trivial nature of Ghits. If there is a decent, neutral WP page simply listing Chinese embassies and missions around the world, that might be worth considering as redirect target. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 01:47, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Deletefails WP:GNG. consulates are not inherently notable. LibStar (talk) 06:27, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.